mattebubben

Already reported. And its seems to be a DCS/ED problem and not a Leatherneck problem (Many of the Aircraft are having similar Major problems for some players since the latest NTTR patch).

Well the 342L should also be HOT capable. (The 342L was very commonly set up in the Anti-Tank role using HOT missiles and was exported in this configuration to many nations some of which used it combat two examples being Iraq and Syria). So the 342M is not the only Gazelle variant carrying the HOT. and i wish our 342L could also be set up to carry the Hot (instead of only having the Rocket/Gun setup). Though i think the ability to carry the Mistral was Specialized so i think a 342L was set up to carry either Mistral or Hot dont think it could carry both at the same time, Though i dont know for sure either way.

They were designed with some of the same Mission types in mind and both being designed for Low altitude high speed interdiction style missions (As well as having Anti-Ship Capability though that ability was more important for the Viggen then it was for the Tornado). But that type of mission / doctrine (High speed low altitude) was pretty standard during the cold war. The Viggen and Tornado has some other similarities though like making a Strike aircraft and then following it up with a Fighter/Interceptor variant. So no the Tornado was not inspiried by the Viggen or the other way around they were just both developed to meet some of the same requirements but they did them in different ways and had different capabilities.

There is a big difference between the two in how they fly though. As the Viggen is just as fast as most fighters in DCS when you throw in the afterburner (If one gets rid of Centerline tanks / Bombs etc) and can cruise at mach 0.8 on military power with a full weapons load. Where as in the A-10 you will tend to keep between 280-320 knots and not much faster (unless clean). But instead the A-10C has a much larger payload so once you reach the target area you can circle it and kill a large number of ground targets (if there are no enemy fighters trying to make life hard for you atleast). Where as in the AJS 37 Viggen you only have 4 Pylons dedicated for Air-Ground weapons (And no Internal gun so if you want to carry guns you need to give up 1 or 2 Air-Ground pylons for the Gunpods) so you are more limited in how many targets you can kill per sortie (Though due to the high speed the trips from base to target area can be completed much quicker then in the A-10). The Viggen is also more hands on and in my opinion significantly more fun to fly and do strikes in. Where as the A-10C is more of a point and click kinda deal once you get to the target area (since if there is a lack of sams or enemy fighters you will simply circle above the target while searching and destroying targets using the TGP and Guided munitions). But for me the there is a simple reason i very much prefer the Viggen (and why i never much liked the A-10). And that is simply a need that the A-10 cannot fulfill ^^. You should also consider that there are more US aircraft With advanced systems,Targeting pods and laser guided munitions that should arrive Soon™ namely the AV-8B NA and the F/A-18C so if those are features that you want but you dont necessarily want the A-10C you could simply wait for one of those (And the Progress on the AV-8B NA looks to be speeding up so it should be out this year probably if not even this summer). Where there is no other aircraft in DCS (or soon to arrive in DCS) that works like the Viggen with its unique mix of 1960s/70s tech and SAAB style "Solutions" ^^. And if you decide to go with the Viggen i would be more then happy to talk you through how to use it (or if somebody else needs that help).

and due to the Modifications to the RM8B it has more thrust, (72.1 kN dry and 125.0 kN as Compared to the 65.6 kN dry and 115.6 kN wet of the RM8A in the other Viggen variants) is better optimized for higher altitude operations and is not sensitive to compressor stalls like the RM8A is (So no risk for compressor stalls when doing rapid throttle changes or doing high AOA maneuvers etc).

Well seeing as the Viggen Came before the Tornado id rather say it was the other way around ^^. With the Viggen having its first flight before Tornado was even designed (And entering full service before the Tornado first flew).

My guess is the additional lift from the fins in the control section will likely make up for the added weight. But that was not what he asked about (and what my comment was targeted at) he asked about the warhead rocket motor burn time and guidance method. And since the guidance section is simply mated with the standard rocket motor and the standard warhead they could simply use the Existing ED data on the Hydra rockets for those stats.

From what i understand it uses the standard Hydra Rocket motor and warheads. So Guidance method should be the only question mark of those 3.

Yea the 530F is the big question mark atm. If the EE could carry it but just never did or if it was unable to do so (due to some modifications or lack of equipment on the spanish aircraft) personally i think the first is more likely but if thats the case Aviodev will have to decide if they want to add it or not. Personally i hope they do add it (if it could be carried in theory) because it will let the F1EE simulate most other F1E variants and will also be significantly more capable when it comes to air-air combat.

the Iraqi Mirage F1EQ-5 and F1EQ-6 had theCyrano IVM radar that let them use the Exocet. (though earlier Iraqi F1EQ variants did not have that capability) The Spanish Mirage F1M had that same Radar upgrade so if it did it might very well be able to use the Exocet. But the initial variant (F1EE) they are making will not have that version of the radar and will most likely not be Exocet capable.

Dont think the Initital F1 we are getting (F1EE) has the ability to use the Exocet. I Think the F1M might have that ability as its radar should be of the upgraded Cyrano IVM standard but the F1EE (Which is gonna be the First variant they make) should not be Exocet capable (if i understand it correctly).

the AV-8B NA does not have a radar so im pretty sure it does not have a IFF Interrogation ability ^^. Though the AV-8B+ if made later on will ofc have IFF.

RagnarDa is a member of the LN team... So this is a campaign produced by LN. Thus making it an Official Campaign.

Well dont really have a problem with this though since if anything it should be more obvious if we want it realistic. Seeing as Any troops under attack would without a doubt Call for help since friendly Fighter assets are available. So unless those troops in question had no communication asset (which would be unlikely in a Major conflict between Nato/Russia) they would be able to alert friendly fighters they were under attack. So if we want realism i might even argue for an Alert when friendly troops are under attack but i understand most A-10 or heli pilots would probably not like that kind of system (though Viggen pilots would probably be less worried ^^) So just having the Kill messages would give far less information to the enemy Cap about Striker movements then what we would have if we wanted to be completely realistic. Kill messages could also make sense especially when it comes to air-air kills as they would most likely be reported as they occurred atleast when it comes to the scoring side (though the side that lost an aircraft would probably realize that quickly enough as well). Would there be away to Delay kill messages? since if they simply put lets say a 3-5 min delay on kill messages this would both make it easier to leave an area before enemy aircraft tried to intercept as a response to a kill message and could also represent the delay in the informations loop (getting the needed info from the Troops in contact to the fighter pilots in question)

This is a Skin that i would love to see in the future. Its based on the JA 37 Fighter Viggen and not the AJ/AJS 37 but i simply love the look of it.

I dont think this video has been posted here already but if it has apologize for the Re-Post. I Found a very interesting Video with a AV-8B pilot. (Who served during the Gulf War) I think most of you (who have not seen it before) will find it interesting.

Have you tried to see if it works with Waypoints that are made during the Mission? (and not Pre-made). Since BX locations work just fine (able to move them around). So maybe waypoints made during the missions work? (Since dont see why only BX waypoints would be moveable for any other reason) Have not tried it yet but i can give it a try in MP tomorrow unless someone does it before me.

Thats a AI thing not a Viggen thing. AI gets Chaff / Flares with whatever they fly without CM pods etc.

Well they stated a long while back (Just after F-14 Announcement but when the Viggen and Corsair where still 2"secret" Modules under development) that they would be up to making a Mig-23 but if they did it would be after the aircraft they had in development at that time. This was more then two years ago so no idea what they decided to do, or if they are doing a Mig-23 (but not yet announced) and that is the reason Razbam had to cancel theirs. We dont really know right not. But since they said they were interested in the possibility of making a Mig-23 i think we can say that the chance of them making a Russian aircraft more modern then the Mig-21 is definitely (If they are allowed to ofc).

Did they say it shared common components? or did it share features etc. Exactly what did it say. Since if its simply shared features that could mean its a 2 seat aircraft or a Swing Wing design (or both).

I have not had this problem for a few weeks though (they made a patch that should have fixed it). so if one of your friends are still having this problems thats strange =P.

If i just lower the Seat slightly to where i can just see the boresight area on the hud (very close to the edge) i can still use the EP-13 Maverick sight without any issues. Or am i misunderstanding what you said =P.

When it comes to the HUD for the mav and Rb 24/74. Simply Lower the seat. There are controls to lower and raise the seat. If you just lower the seat a bit you should be able to see the Boresight area just fine on the hud.

A japanese Skin would also be quite suitable as Japan was one of the nations that looked at the AJ 37 in the early 70s as a Primary Anti-ship aircraft with a secondary strike role (So pretty much the exact type of missions the AJ 37 was designed to fill) And purely performance wise id say the Viggen would have been more capable then the F-1 for that type if mission. though if i recall correctly the Japanese had some concerns about the range / loiter time of the Viggen (dont know if that is correct though as the F-1 does not seem to have a significant Range advantage over the Viggen unless it gives up its Anti-ship missiles for external fuel tanks) But its possible that cost / politics also made an impact on the choice (as its rare that performance/capabilities are the only or even the most important factors when it comes to acquiring combat aircraft). So they decided to go with the Japanese Mitsubishi F-1 in the end instead of the Viggen. So a Japanese Viggen is one of the more believable what if skins.

this would also be a useful call to have. And it will for sure be something that my Rio will be wondering plenty of times.